Debates between Lord Evans of Rainow and Lord Kennedy of Southwark during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Leasehold Properties: Building Insurance

Debate between Lord Evans of Rainow and Lord Kennedy of Southwark
Thursday 15th June 2023

(1 year, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Kennedy of Southwark Portrait Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. I declare my interests as set out in the register and the fact that I am a leaseholder.

Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, the Government intend to enact reforms to improve the building insurance market for leaseholders by banning commissions on insurance premiums, increasing transparency of information and preventing unjustified legal fees when challenging costs. We are also working with industry to reduce and clarify charges as a matter of priority ahead of reforms coming into force. Our aim is to ensure insurance costs are fairer and more transparent and give more confidence to the leaseholder to challenge costs.

Lord Kennedy of Southwark Portrait Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, leaseholders are often also mortgage payers and are suffering during the cost of living crisis with higher bills for things such as food and energy. What we need in the insurance market is for insurers to treat leaseholders as customers, as they are the ones paying the bills. It is good to hear from the Minister that commissions will be banned, but when will that happen? Will the Minister set out what he and his department can do before any forthcoming legislation? Will either he or the noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Bybrook, agree to meet me and members of the National Leasehold Campaign to discuss the issue and the wider problems leaseholders face? Finally, will he join me in paying tribute to the National Leasehold Campaign for its relentless work in highlighting the problems faced by millions of our fellow citizens?

Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, first, I pay tribute to the noble Lord for the work he has done on this subject and for his many years of public service, for his party and his community, as a councillor in Southwark.

We are committed to working with industry to bring down premium increases in the first instance. The Secretary of State has asked the FCA to do whatever it can to press insurance brokers to reduce unreasonable fees ahead of government action to ban managing agents, landlords and freeholders taking commissions when they take out buildings insurance. The Association of British Insurers is planning to launch a scheme for buildings with fire safety issues and very high premiums by summer 2023 at the latest. Ministers will continue to monitor the progress of the scheme and have made it clear that they expect the scheme to be delivered by summer 2023 to provide urgent assistance to affected buildings. I am very happy to meet with the noble Lord and engage with members of the National Leasehold Campaign; I pay tribute to the work it has done.

Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Evans of Rainow and Lord Kennedy of Southwark
Lord Kennedy of Southwark Portrait Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I speak on behalf of my noble friend Lady Sherlock, who cannot be here today due to ill health. I will not detain the House for long, but I commend the right reverend Prelate on the perseverance he has shown in raising this issue with Ministers in every conceivable way, in Oral Questions and debates, by publishing reports, in meetings with Ministers, and now through a Private Member’s Bill. In doing so, he has given us the chance not just to discuss the important issue of the two-child limit but to highlight the growing problem of child poverty in Britain today. Sending the Bill to the other place will now give MPs the opportunity to reflect on the important issues it raises. However, before the Bill reaches them, it may be helpful if Ministers could do two things.

First, Ministers can clarify what they are trying to achieve through this policy, because it has felt a bit of a slippery target. It was initially about saving money to reduce the deficit, even though evidence now shows that the money the coalition Government saved on benefit cuts was then spent on tax cuts. Then it was about being fair to those in work, even though the two-child limit affects in-work benefits such as universal credit, and then, at least implicitly, it was to affect decisions on how many children people have. Since the evidence suggests that people hit by the two-child limit are not having any fewer children, and since most people hit are in work, can the Minister tell the House whether the policy has been a success?

Secondly, the right reverend Prelate asked at Second Reading whether the Government would introduce an impact assessment. That is not unreasonable, given that the policy has now been in operation for over six years. The then Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Stedman-Scott, replied:

“To be truthful and straightforward, I cannot commit to an impact assessment. I do not believe, with what I know, that the Government would welcome from me the request that he has made”.—[Official Report, 8/7/22; col. 1228.]


The fact that Ministers in the other place would not like being asked to do it is not a good reason for the Government to refuse to tell us what the impact of the policy would be. Will this Minister be brave enough to go and ask the Secretary of State to produce an impact assessment? That would inform the debate in the other place rather well. I look forward to his reply.

Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate for bringing the Bill to the House and giving us the opportunity to debate this important issue, and I thank those who have participated and engaged on the Bill.

The Government think that it is of utmost importance to support children and families and are committed to helping parents into work. That requires a balanced system that provides strong work incentives and support for those who need it, but which ensures a sense of fairness to the taxpayer and many working families who do not see their incomes rise when they have more children. We believe that the policy to support a maximum of two children is a proportionate way to achieve these objectives. That our overall approach is working is evidenced by the fact that, between 2016 and 2022, the number of people in couples with children in employment has increased by 372,000—a 2.7 percentage point increase in the employment rate for this group. However, we recognise that some claimants are not able to make the same choices about the number of children in their family. That is why exceptions have been put in place to protect certain groups.

Child benefit may be paid for all children, plus the additional amount in child tax credit or indeed universal credit for any qualifying disabled children or qualifying disabled young people. Additional help for eligible childcare costs through working tax credit and universal credit is available, regardless of the total number of children in the household.

The most suitable way to lift children out of poverty is by supporting parents into, and to progress in, work wherever possible. The Government have consistently said that the best way to support people’s living standards is through good work, better skills and higher wages. The reduction in the universal credit taper rate and the £500 increase to the work allowance, in addition to the normal benefits uprating, alongside the landmark Kickstart and Restart schemes, demonstrated my department’s commitment to supporting families to move into or to progress in work.

The Government clearly recognise that high childcare costs can affect parents’ decisions to take up paid work or increase their working hours, which is why the changes to the universal credit childcare element announced in the Spring Budget 2023 will provide generous additional financial support to parents moving into work and/or increasing their working hours.

The department will exempt any flexible support fund payment for up-front childcare costs made to childcare providers from the universal credit childcare cost calculation when parents move into work or significantly increase their working hours. In practice, this means that the parent will be reimbursed for up to 85% of that FSF payment, as if they had paid it themselves. This provides parents with a significant payment of childcare costs, up front, to use for their next set of childcare costs, thereby easing universal credit claimants into the universal credit childcare costs payment cycle.

The department will also increase the generosity of the universal credit childcare costs caps, allowing parents to claim back over £300 more for one child or over £500 for two or more children of their childcare costs per month. This increase is roughly in line with CPI since 2006, and will increase the caps from £646 for one child and £1,100 for two or more children to £950 and £1,600 respectively.

By September 2025, eligible working parents of children aged nine months to when they start school will be able to get 30 hours of free childcare in England.

The Bill introduced by the right reverend Prelate seeks to remove the limit on the number of children or qualifying young persons included in the calculation of an award of universal credit. The Government have a range of policies which support children and families across the tax and benefits system and public services. However, this requires striking a balance, and the Government’s view is that providing support for a maximum of two children in universal credit and child tax credit ensures fairness between claimants and those who support themselves solely through work.

As regards the noble Lord’s question to the noble Baroness, Lady Stedman-Scott, regarding an impact assessment, I will certainly feed that request back to the department.